[antlr-interest] Bug in antlrjar.xml

[Jim Idle]

I probably didn't specify the version of the assembly plugin and apparently they changed behavior between betas. 

Jim



> -----Original Message-----
> From: antlr-interest-bounces at antlr.org [mailto:antlr-interest-
> bounces at antlr.org] On Behalf Of Johannes Bittner
> Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 2:06 PM
> To: antlr-interest at antlr.org
> Subject: [antlr-interest] Bug in antlrjar.xml
> 
> Hello antlr-interest,
> 
> I just fetched the source of ANTLR from perforce and noticed that
> building the assembly ("Uber jar") didn't succeed (the actual building
> of ANTLR did), it failed with the following error message:
> 
> [ERROR] BUILD ERROR
> [INFO] ----------------------------------------------------------------
> --------
> [INFO] Error reading assemblies: Error reading descriptor at:
> antlrjar.xml: Unrecognised tag: 'useProjectArtifact' (position:
> START_TAG seen ... causes silly things to happen.\n      -->\n
> <useProjectArtifact>... @21:25)
> 
> My system is Ubuntu 9.10, I use maven 2.2.1 and the version of the
> assembly plugin is 2.2-beta-4. I know next to nothing about maven, but
> a helpful maven developer, jdcasey, in the #maven IRC channel (at
> irc.codehaus.org) helped me do fix this. I attached the new
> antlrjar.xml.
> 
> 
> 
> Also, he made some suggestions concerning the current antlrjar.xml
> which might be helpful, I'll paste some lines from the IRC log here
> 
> 22:40:42 < jdcasey> johannes: maybe the POM doesn't specify a version
> of the assembly plugin...it may be resolving the latest released
> version, which leaves
>                     you open to changes in behavior. POMs should pin
> this down, I'd say.
> 22:41:13 < jdcasey> actually, it leaves you open to using the version
> specified in the super-POM for the maven version you're using, in the
> case of the
>                     assembly plugin
> [------------snip---------------]
> 22:44:59 < johannes> jdcasey: I'll write a message to a antlr mailing
> list concerning this 22:45:30 < jdcasey> cool, that'd be great...fwiw,
> the old descriptor probably wasn't doing quite what they wanted
> there...it would have included the main
>                     project artifact, and plainly wasn't meant to :)
> 22:46:15 < johannes> what does that mean, main project artifact? (I
> know next to nothing about mvn ;-).) 22:47:30 < jdcasey> johannes: they
> were trying to say, "Process all of the project dependencies by
> unpacking them into this new assembly"
> 22:47:41 < jdcasey> the main project artifact is the jar (or whatever)
> produced by the current build
> 22:47:59 < jdcasey> so, they didn't want that jar included, only the
> jars of dependencies, which were to be unpacked
> 22:48:38 < johannes> jdcasey: but the resulting .jar worked?
> 22:48:39 < jdcasey> then, it looks like they caught the classes
> compiled for the current project by using a fileSet
>                     pointed at target/classes (from what I saw, anyway)
> 22:48:48 < jdcasey> yeah, b/c of that last bit :)
> 22:48:51 < johannes> hmm.
> 22:49:06 < johannes> maybe I should attach that chatlog to the mail?
> 22:49:14 < jdcasey> it amounts to the same thing, usually...whether you
> unpack the jar you just built, or gather the
>                     classes you used to build the jar in the first
> place
> 22:49:22 < jdcasey> up to you, but fine by me
> 
> HTH
> 
> Greets, Johannes